OPHIOLEPIDAE 



337 



The specimen from St. 191, False Bay, South Africa, cannot simply be identified 

 with the South American specimens of Ophiocten amitmum. It differs from the latter 

 in the character of the arm comb, in the arms being more distinctly carinate, and in the 

 colour, the arms being distinctly banded, with alternating white and dark, brownish 

 bands. The more important difference is in the arm comb. In the South African form 

 the comb continues downwards, along the genital slit, which it does not do in the South 

 American form; further there is a distinct inner comb, whereas in the South American 

 form there is no such distinct inner comb (Fig. 48 a, b). 



In my Echinoderms of South Africa {he. cit.) I pointed out the close resemblance 

 between this South African form and the North Atlantic Ophiiira ajfmis, Liitken. As a 



Fig. 48. Part of dorsal side of Ophiocten amitinum, Lyman {a) and of the var. simulans, n.var. (b). 

 a is from a specimen 6 mm. in diameter of disk, b from a specimen 5'5 mm. in diameter. X22"5. 



matter of fact, I do not see how they can be distinguished, and I am very much tempted 

 to regard the South African ^^ Ophiocten amitinum" as identical with Ophiura (iffinis. 

 I do not do so here for two reasons; first, because I have not seen any specimen of 

 Ophiocten omitimim from the type locality, off Kerguelen — perhaps the Kerguelen 

 specimens will prove to differ from those from South America and be more like the 

 South African form; and then we do not know O. ajfinis from the West African Coast, 

 unless the Ophiocten africamim of Koehler should prove to be identical with affinis 

 (in my Echinoderms of South Africa, p. 391, I have expressed the opinion that it is more 

 nearly related to the Mediterranean O. Griibei, Heller). In view of these uncertainties 

 I think it preferable for the present to designate the South African form as a variety of 

 Ophiocten amitinum, var. simulans, n.var. 



18-2 



